Woolwich — Ward 3
2 candidates responded
Eryn Koncir See responses
It should be more transparent and accessible
- Actively pursue provincial and federal transfer funding and grants
- Exploring new local revenue tools where permitted by provincial legislation
- Before asking taxpayers for more
- Council should understand where the money is going
- identify efficiencies and lower-priority spending
- and make sure existing services are delivering value. Where additional revenue is genuinely necessary to maintain core services and infrastructure
- increases should be transparent
- predictable and clearly justified.
- Ensure new development pays a greater share of long-term infrastructure costs
- Re-evaluate development incentives or subsidies that create long-term liabilities
- Recover growth-related costs as fully and fairly as provincial legislation allows
- including long-term operating
- maintenance and replacement impacts—not just upfront construction costs.
- Protect core services first
- look for more efficient ways to deliver them
- and review discretionary spending before asking taxpayers to absorb higher increases.
- Prioritize maintenance and state-of-good-repair over expansion
- Require lifecycle cost analysis before approving any new infrastructure
- Defer or cancel capital projects with low long-term return on investment
Please describe one concrete example of a trade-off you would support (or oppose) when costs rise faster than revenues.candidate's own words
If costs were rising faster than revenues, I would support deferring or cancelling a lower-priority capital expansion project before reducing core services or accepting a large tax increase. I would first want to understand the project’s full lifecycle cost, whether it is genuinely needed now, and what value it delivers compared with maintaining existing infrastructure. If the return is weak or the project creates significant future operating and replacement costs, deferral may be the more responsible choice.
Would you like to provide any additional context for your views on budgets?candidate's own words
My approach to municipal budgeting is to protect core services, maintain the infrastructure we already own, and make sure new spending is financially sustainable over the long term. Before asking taxpayers for more, Council should understand where the money is going, identify efficiencies, review lower-priority or discretionary spending, and make sure programs and capital projects are delivering value. I do not support arbitrary tax freezes or across-the-board cuts. Where additional revenue is genuinely necessary, increases should be transparent, predictable and clearly justified. I also believe Council should pay closer attention to lifecycle costs, reserve pressures and future replacement obligations so today’s decisions do not simply create larger costs for future taxpayers.
If you chose "It should be more transparent and accessible", please describe how.candidate's own words
Municipal financial information should be easier for residents to find, understand and connect to the decisions Council is making. I would support clearer public reporting that shows where tax dollars are going, how spending is changing over time, what major capital projects cost, how they are funded, and what future operating and replacement costs they create. Residents should also be able to see how investment and service levels differ across communities, where that information is available, rather than having to piece it together from multiple reports.
Janet Cox See responses
It should be more transparent and accessible
- Moderate, predictable tax increases to maintain service levels
- Actively pursue provincial and federal transfer funding and grants
- Rapidly implement energy saving technologies that lower the consumption of energy by municipal buildings and transportation to save money and green house gas emissions in the future.
- Re-evaluate development incentives or subsidies that create long-term liabilities
- Higher level governments should pay a greater share of sustainable long-term infrastructure costs
- especially when promoting or mandating growth strategies.
- Adjust service delivery models to reduce costs without reducing access
- ensure that services that protect the environment
- mitigate against climate change and support low-income and vulnerable residents are maintained.
- Prioritize maintenance and state-of-good-repair over expansion
- Require lifecycle cost analysis before approving any new infrastructure
- All new capital projects should be durable and energy efficient to decrease unecessary energy use and repair costs.
Please describe one concrete example of a trade-off you would support (or oppose) when costs rise faster than revenues.candidate's own words
Seeking technical innovations that can accomplish needed services more efficiently and therefore cost effectively. Seek industry partners for demonstration projects and sponsorship to offset costs to taxpayers.
Would you like to provide any additional context for your views on budgets?candidate's own words
Plain language and graphic summaries that are up to date and using plain language should be available. Understanding budgets and financial literacy should be part of school curricula.
If you chose "It should be more transparent and accessible", please describe how.candidate's own words
Budgets should be shared with residents in a way that is clear and understandable. Tools to interpret information in a clear and non-technical way should be explored.
On the ballot but have not responded to survey (2)
- Bonnie Bryant
- Jeff Carruthers
Full candidate list: CBC Waterloo Region election coverage ↗